That comment sounds like somebody who has an anti Paterno agenda.
First, the discussion was that it's difficult to compare coaches/players from different eras. The intention was to avoid comparing one coach to the other but you felt compelled to take a shot at Joe. Second, I think even the most staunch Paterno supporters agree that he stayed too long. So why must we relitigate that?
But you asked so here goes:
- Joe's career record was 409-136-3 (75%). That includes all years both good and bad. He also won a record 24 bowl games (when they meant something) and had 5 undefeated seasons.
- From 1995-1999 Joe was 48-14 (77%) with no team finishing worse than 16th. I don't understand your criticism.
- From 2000-2004 Joe was 26-33 (44%). Those were the dark years when almost everybody thought Joe stayed too long. No excuse!
- From 2005-2011 Joe was 65-20 (77%). Somehow Joe managed to reinvent himself and I have no idea how he did it considering his health and inability to travel to recruit. During that stretch he won 2 BiG titles, had a top 3 finish, 2 other top 10 finishes, and 2 other top 25 finishes.
So what's his excuse? He stayed too long and doesn't get an excuse. But the bad period wasn't 1995-2012. It was 2000-2004. More importantly it was a different time. Joe focused more on academics and didn't have to worry about paying players. I don't think he would have survived in today's game but that doesn't diminish what he accomplished over the course of his career.